Finally found a definitive guide to Green Power options. The following ‘Choice’ article provides easy-to-understand explanations and info about the different Green options. http://money.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=273622
However, I wonder why it has to be all so hard for the consumer to make a positive contribution to the environment. According to this article, if you choose to take up the 100% green option, you are up for a steep increase in your power charges.
Why do we have to”buy” green power and forced to pay premium prices? Why doesn’t the government simply make green power available to all who request it without the extra charges? Shouldn’t a positive government initiative include a more committed response and thorough approach?
After all, we are all in this together, are we not? So the benefits would affect us all, just as the adverse effects reach all. The government ought to be concerned for the welfare of our people and the environment has an enormous influence on our health, which in turn affects productivity, which in turn feeds back into society and affects our standard of living.
I’m sure the answer lies somewhere between profits and ignorance and the excuses blame funding and unawareness.
I need new skivvies/turtlenecks for winter, to replace the old and worn ones that are about to be demoted to pyjama status.
Where might one be able to find a decent quality 100% cotton skivvy/turtleneck for up to $20? Doesn’t need to be fancy, just plain enough to be worn under my winter woolies.
Cheers!
I need help in deciding on a new Smartphone, upgrading from a Treo 600. Need to choose between two options: Treo 680 or 750 (see official comparison chart http://www.palm.com/us/products/resources/comparison-smartphone.html ).
Am unsure about the operating systems and whether the screen resolution or camera differences are worth considering in making a decision.
Any advice, especially from the tech-heads (you know who you are), will be much appreciated.
Cheers!
Noticed this username “wwf logo“ in the comments to one of my posts, so I went to read the coressponding comment only to find the space blank underneath this username. Curious to see the actual homepage of this identity, I clicked (as you do) on the username (”wwf logo”) and was surprised to find myself not at any official nook page but at the undertakers!!
How spooky! My question is: who/what is this and who/what did this??
Admin?? There must be an explanation, surely!! Does anybody know??
All that talk of ghosts and epitaphs on nook maybe??!!
In light of recent nook discussions re bullying, which generated some interest, here is a news article about a possible $1M payout to a victim of school bullying: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=266948
The court ruled in favour of the now 18 yr old victim who was bullied at primary school many years ago. Basically, the court heard that the school failed in its duty of care, allowing the bullying to continue and the victim to be subjected to constant torment and abuse causing such trauma as to eventually precipitate a psychiatric disorder in the victim.
No amount of money can give this young man his life and childhood back, but at the very least it might serve as a token apology and acknowledgement from the law, on behalf of the school and the community, for the suffering endured.
It would be a way of saying that what happened was wrong, that it should not have happened, that the schol should have exercised appropriate duty of care (which it did not do) and that the community and the law say “no” and let this be a lesson to the school and a warning to all other schools to be more vigilant and caring for the welfare of its members.
That the DET now want to appeal must feel like an additional kick in the guts for the poor kid! In this situation, the best (and most noble) response from the DET would be to hand in their robe aswell as the cloak- and say “sorry”..
I have just read the article, “Warning sounded over soldier suicides”
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=72848
A tragic and typical case of let’s-blame-the-victim bureaucracy.
I was appalled to read the insensitive response by the Aus government. Not only have ADF superiors and gov officials, such as Tony Abbot, totally denied accountability in an attempt to avoid any liability, but they alarmingly push the responsibility back on the poor soldiers who have been damaged by their compulsory deployment.
These poor souls are forced into a war created by the UAU (Usa, Aus and Uk) AXIS (the true motives of which are still unknown) and their deployment is dictated by the heads of these nations. It is clear that the soldiers who are sent to fight in the mid-east are forced and controlled by the same gov that now has the audacity to blame the damaged soldiers for not accessing the “programs” stating that “the government can’t control the actions of these soldiers”!
What program is ever going to help a severely damaged, traumatized individual who has been forced to witness and or perform or partake in atrocities beyond normal human comprehension? Why not avoid the damage in the first place by eliminating the damaging causes? That is, do not create a war that never needed to exist and do not send our soldiers to fight another country’s war anyway.
Better still, if the gov insists on there being a war, then why not get all those MP’s who voted in favour of it into army gear and ship them over to the war zone? Let them do the tour of duty if they believe in it so much and we can then all watch as they carry out their convctions in typical parlimentary circus-like fashion.
I’m sure the country won’t miss them too much! In fact, while they’re gone, let those damaged souls help run the country and we might even see some changes for the better!
Yesterday our household signed up with Victoria Electricity for our electricity supply after a door-knocking rep from the company claimed that they offer 100% green energy. We were told that we’d be saving the planet approx5-7 tonnes of carbon emissions per year.
But I wonder whether these claims are genuine and if they’re possible to verify. Is there any central body that monitors these companies and their claims to help keep the system honest and fair for the well-meaning consumer?
In the brochure, the information claims that 10% of the energy comes from accredited green sources whilst the other 90% is from non-accredited sources. Does this mean that we can’t be certain that the 90% of energy is actually green because it has not been accredited or is it actually green despite failing accreditation for whatever reason??
Just wondering…
Who decided to kill Saddam Hussein and why?
15 Answers Published 1 year, 7 months ago in Making News.Just wondering whether it was necessary and justifiable to take the life of former Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein. Seems that another dictator, Mr G.Bush Jr, decided that he did not quite like the way Mr Hussein ruled over his country and objected to certain of his practices, so decided to invade the mid-east country and remove its leader, leaving a trail of collateral damage behind.
Essentially, Mr Hussein was arrested, charged, imprisoned, tried and executed all by foreigners. But who were these foreigners and who sanctioned the process? Was it really legal?
There’s little dispute that Mr Hussein must have been a terrible dictator and committed some terrible things, but was his execution really necessary? Could he not have simply been kept in prison for the term of his natural life? Perhaps he could have even been put to some good use and been ordered to do some sort of hard physical or other labour..
It’s a pity that the international community for law and order could not actually just go peacefully into Iraq, knock on Mr Hussein’s door and present him with a summons to appear at court on a certain date or simply arrest him without any difficulties, in a civil manner, whilst Mr Hussein peacefully complies with all orders and requests and accompanies his captors peacefully and quietly.. Just a thought- maybe in a more ideal world.
In response to the nooker that astonishingly asked why bother saving water, the idea is to simply stop WASTING water. You are wasting water when you shower longer than is necessary (and it is not necessary to come out a prune). Remember that water is a finite natural resource and in the real, natural world money and politics do not factor and cannot change this fact. It is wise and absolutely imperative that we all do our part to stop water wastage. However, the major threat to our precious water supplies would sadly have to be unscrupulous businesses who put profit above health and environmental concern. Think of all the water that is used (wasted) in the production of so many unnecessary products that end up choking up land fills in the end!
